GEOLOGY is a System of CLASSIFICATIONS, a Language (excellent bookkeeping, without Accounting). Earth Science uses their Nomenclature, with Mathematics and PHYSICS, to understand the Earth. Learning a Language yields NO INSIGHT into the DYNAMICS of the Earth, when TERMS are used for FACTS! I will Correct inaccurate Assertions, as I find them. Ignore ASSERTIONS such as Mantle Plumes and Plate Theory- which are ARTIFICIAL concepts, created by Man; these require Continuous ADJUSTMENT!

Saturday, November 26, 2011

It took me seven years of trial and error, to solve one of the simplest of mathematical relations: the HARMONICS of the BINARY THEOREM and how they relate to the AXIAL, ELLIPTICAL, AND PRECESSIONAL CYCLES discovered by Engineer Milankovitch. Milankovitch contrived by mathematics that the climate derived from cycles of WOBBLES of the Poles, in 25, 41, and 100 kilo year periods. I have extended this to include the daily weather and the movements of the CRUST of the EARTH and the oceanic currents, which are on cycles determined by the relative viscosities of the atmosphere, water, and the crust; they are roughly 1:100:10 exponent 10 to each other. The basic start to understanding the BINARY THEOREM is from the various extinctions noticed by paleontologists, from fossil counts in the sedimentary record. They are noticed as being in a series, approximated by the numbers 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 128, 256, 512, 1024, 2048, and 4096 million years of AGE. There is a small percentage error (less than 3%), comparing these numbers to those in the fossil record- as measured in age by radioactivity, e.g. 65 KT, 251 PTr, and 505 Burgess Shale. However, it is anticipated that minor events, such as movements of comets, asteroids and distant objects from the sun can account for the small differences. It is expected that the number 4.096 billion years is the AGE of the formation of the moon, caused by a glancing collision of a planetoid with the earth. Again, an error of near 2% may be expected. This age establishes the binary series initiation, which was determined by the binary relation of the EARTH-MOON, which is fixed by the gravitational influence of the solar system. The ratio of separation of the earth to sun to that of earth-moon is roughly 400:1 (392, more precisely)- which is also established gravitationally, and this number is important for later incorporation. The numbers with 4, such as 400, 40 k.y., 40 m.y. and 4 m.y. will be shown to be involved later. The harmonics of the binary theorem are also important: 10, 20, 40, 80, 160, 320, 640, 1280, 2560, 5120, 10,240, 20,480, and 40,960- the apparent number of years in the AXIAL CYCLE of MILANKOVITCH. This series continues, but the above numbers are sufficient for now. This last number introduces the first possible error (1/10th %), since the number 41 is usually cited, and the series may have a divergence from Milankovitch. The next round of harmonics involves the numbers: 100, 200, 400, 800, 1600, 3200, 6400, 12800 (approximately the presently-sought Mastodon killer at 12,900 years AGE), and 25,600 years- the maximum time interval of the MILANKOVITCH PRECESSIONAL CYCLE (literature cites 21.5-24.5). These are the approximate ages of ancient earthquakes, and for my local area, the Hurricane fault experienced two quakes separated by 90 years: 1902-1992 (10% error- statistical?). This will be important later for predicting quakes, and we can check this with the seismic records. Now we have a chance to determine which is more correct: is the AXIAL CYCLE 41k.y. or 40, 960 years? Further, is the ELLIPTICAL CYCLE 100 K.Y. or 102,400, as would be predicted by the BINARY THEOREM? The first Google earth photo shows that there is a relation of the elliptical arrangement of protrusions in ZION National Park, which can be fairly accurately measured. This will be our starting point, where we will determine the relationship of all of these features (which are gravitationally-arranged by the earth, moon, and sun).

As to the number 4- noticed in the 400 ratio of spacing of earth-Sun to EARTH-moon, 40 k.y., 40m.y., and in the absence of 4 m.y. in extinctions noticed in the fossil record; it is found that the minor extinctions occur at AGES such as 192 m.y. and other “skipped” times in major episodes (KT, PTr. GREAT UNCONFORMITY of the Grand Canyon, and 32 m.y. Oregon plant die-off). I project that the number 4 is a “forbidden” number, due to other events occurring at 40 k.y., 40 m.y. and 4 m.y. We will attempt to locate the OTHER EVENTS.LOOKING AT THE FULCRUM OF THE ZION ELLIPSE, THERE IS A DIVERGENCE OF FRACTURE LINES (SHEAR INDICATIONS)- THERE IN A SMALLER ELLIPSE OF 100K.Y. ROTATION. THIS HELPS TO DETERMINE THE ACCURACY OF EARLIER APPRAISALS. WE ARE WORKING FROM ONLY ONE KNOWN SET OF PRINCIPLES: THE RATIOS OF ELLIPTICAL TO AXIAL TIMES OF COMPLETION, AND THE 1.6 RATIO OF AXIAL/PRECESSIONAL CYCLES. EVERYTHING ELSE, INCLUDING THE AGE OF THE INCIPIENCE OF ALL THIS HAS TO BE DETERMINED, BUT WE CAN RELY SOMEWHAT ON THE KNOWN AGE OF THE ELTANIN EVENT- EITHER 2 OR 2.15 M.Y.

SINCE I AM NOT CERTAIN OF THE TIME SCALE, THE EXPANDED GOOGLE EARTH PHOTO IS SHOWN TO LOCATE AND MEASURE THE DIAMETER OF AN AXIAL OR PRECESSIONAL CELL. THIS IS SHOWN BELOW, WHERE THERE IS A FULCRUM OF ALL THE VARIOUS FRACTURES NEARBY AND THEIR AGES IS LOCATED. THIS FEATURE IS AS YET UNKNOWN, BUT IS LEADING TO THE ANCIENT AND PRESENT LOCUS OF THE STRESSES SHOWN IN YOUNGEST ZION PARK:Should the binary theorem be correct, the first test of it should be in the ratio AXIAL/PRECESSIONAL CYCLE RATIO. This, by the numbers, would be: 40.96/25.6 k.y.= 1.6 exactly, not using the MILANKOVITCH measurements and calculations of 41/25= 1.64. This small difference does not seem important, but the less than 1% variation is valuable from the PROOF standpoint. This should be noticed with the most concisely-presented ALEUTIAN SPIRAL, since there are no land masses to distort the presentation (except the prime targets- the Aleutian islands):The next question to ask is: what is the earth tides magnitude on the east side of the Alaskan Spiral? When the convex side points eastward, the lunar tides of 20mm/yr are offset, and the solar tides are all that remains (10.24). Let’s test this magnitude by dividing into the measured diameter of 627.16km; the time would be 31.36m/y/ if normal tides were used. 627.16/10.24= 61.24m.y., which added to the inflection time of 19.6m.y. is 80.84m.y. (START OF THE ALEUTIAN SPIRAL, BEFORE THE KT INCIDENT, IN NOVENA RIDGE, SIBERIA) Notice that this AGE/8M.Y./CYCLE= 10.2, ALMOST THE BINARY THEOREM PREDICTION!Now adding to the measured and calculated time of 45.9m.y. (to return to the initiation of the EMPEROR SEAMOUNT CHAIN) yields a total TIME of 126.74m.y. THIS IS AN INTERVAL OF TIME, NOT THE AGE. THE AGE IS FOUND BY ADDING THE TIME OF THE EMPEROR SEAMOUNT CHAIN (65M.Y.) INITIATION- TO THE INTERVAL- YIELDING 192M.Y. THIS IS SAME AGE I HAVE CALCULATED FOR THE ALEUTIAN CHAIN FROM ITS INCIPIENCE- THAT OF 192M.Y. OR THE TIME OF THE MINOR EXTINCTION AT THE JURASSIC NAVAJO FORMATION BORDER.

SHOULD YOU BE SKEPTICAL OF THE "UNIVERSALITY" OF THE 1.6 RATIO AND SCALE OF THE AXIAL, ELLIPTICAL, AND PRECCESSIONAL CYCLES FOR ROCKS, FEATURES, WEATHER, AND APPLICABILITY TO THE BINARY ARRANGEMENTS, VIEW THE FOLLOWING: HERE'S HOW THE 8/5 RATIO SHOWS UP FOR THE NORTH AMERICAN QUADRANSPHERE (8000/5000KM): IT IS NOT FOR THE EMPEROR SEAMOUNT CHAIN TO THE MAR, AS I SUPPOSED, BUT LIES BETWEEN THE WAKE ISLAND FEATURE AND THE EDGE OF THE ATLANTIC CONTINENTAL SLOPE, WHERE THE DEPTH INCREASES DRAMATICALLY. SURPRISE, EH! BUT WE CONTINUE, KNOWING THAT THE FEATURE IS DIVULGING ADDITIONAL INFO ABOUT THE CRUST OF THE EARTH:THERE IS A VAST AMOUNT OF NEW REVELATION- WHERE THE SUBLITIES OF THE EVENT OF 256 M.Y. ARE PORTRAYED:IT ISN'T A SIMPLE SOLUTION, SUCH AS THE CONTRAST OF COLORADO PLATEAU WITH THE BASIN AND RANGE BORDER AT THE WASATCH LINE; IT HAS A TREMENDOUS PAST, WHERE THE PTr EVENT, KT, AND YOUNGER EVENTS HAVE LEFT THEIR IMPRINTS. WE'LL SORT THIS OUT, KNOWING THAT THERE WILL BE OTHER ADDITIONS TO THE BINARY THEOREM. IT SEEMS FAIRLY DEFINITE THAT THE MILANKOVITCH RATIO OF 1.6, ALONG WITH THE 25.6, 40.96, AND 102.4 K.Y. CYCLE TIMES ARE ACCURATE. MALINKOVITCH GOT THEM AS ACCURATELY AS POSSIBLE, WITHOUT DEVELOPING AN UNDERLYING THEOREM.

Another finding that has proved consistent is that each rise is surrounded by a basin, about which there is a larger RISE. For example, within the Colorado Plateau there is the San Juan Basin, within which there are DIATREMES, above which there are SINKS, in the form of waterholes: ILLUSTRATION OF THE SINK (POND) WITHIN A RISE (SHIPROCK), WITHIN A SINK (SAN JUAN BASIN) IS SHOWN BELOW IN THE 2 PHOTOS: NOTICE THAT SHIPROCK ELLIPSES CONFIRM THAT CONVEX ARCS TO THE EAST DIMINISH THE TIDAL MOVEMENT TO THAT OF THE SOLAR TIDE ALONE; THE SOLAR INFLUENCE IS 10.24MM/YR, AS CONTRASTED WITH LUNAR FRICTION- WHICH IS 20MM/YR (POSSIBLY 20.48- I'LL HAVE TO DISSECT THIS DEVELOPMENT):

This cannot proceed forever, since there is ENTROPY (CHAOS), which is not zero. There is some transfer of energy outside the SOLAR SYSTEM, which has given rise to the search for a companion star, or a twin (BINARY, with the sun). This is beyond my capability, and astronomers will undoubtedly find the twin eventually- providing it does not remain behind the sun (to do so, with astronomically distant twin stars, it is extremely unlikely THAT A STAR WOULD EXACTLY REMAIN THE SAME THROUGHOUT THE YEAR, BEHIND THE SUN- TRAVELLING AT THE SAME REVOLUTION, BUT AT A MUCH GREATER DISTANCE). Since we have developed the BINARY THEOREM, there are likely more duos than the sets of volcanoes (within an ellipse), CP-B&R duo, and larger sets which are shown by the QUADRANSPHERE of the Atlantic to the Pacific.

BELOW IS A SET OF EARTH TIDE SEPARATIONS, TAKEN NEAR THE MENDOCINO TRANSFORM, BEING JUDICIOUS TO SELECT THOSE FOR AN EXAMPLE, WHICH DO NOT OCCUR EAST OF A CONVEX-EASTWARD ARC (WHICH WOULD INDUCE SMALLER MAGNITUDES). THE AVERAGE FOR ONLY 3 CASES IS 20.43KM/M.Y., NEAR THE BINARY THEOREM ANTICIPATION OF 20.48. HOWEVER, I FIND THAT THERE ARE FEW WHICH MEET THE REQUIREMENTS 1. OF WESTWARD ARC INFLUENCES, 2. AVERAGE BETWEEN TWO MAJOR N-S LINEARS, AND 3. ELIMINATION OF SUSPECT INFLUENCES- SUCH AS SLICES WITHIN THE MEASURED SECTION. WE WILL LOOK NEAR THE EQUATOR AND IN THE ATLANTIC FOR CASES WHICH MEET THE REQUIREMENTS:Binary twin for the sun Any star, which is coupled with our SUN, would be gravitationally positioned according to the ratio of measured SUN-EARTH/MOON-EARTH/ This is near 400, and the findings of order according to the BINARY THEOREM would suggest the square of 400= 160,000 (1.6 x 10exp +5). Distances are measured in AU, or astronomical distances (units) from earth to sun. This would place it outside the Oort Cloud, which has as an outer limit approximated by 10exp +5AU. This distance is vague and un-confirmed, but serves as a guide to the location of any binary star. The first binary pair of stars discovered was that of Mizar, in the constellation of URSA MAJOR (great bear). This is a favorite of mine, from my celestial navigation days, from my memory of the arrangement in the big dipper: d,m,p,m,a,m,a- dubhe, merak, phecda, megres, alioth, mizar (near alcor- sky positioned), alkaid. Proxima Centauri is the closest star to our solar system, and therefore the first candidate for a binary associate. it is greater than 4 light years distant- which is much greater than 1 AU (150 million km/3 x 10 exp+5 km/seconds, or about 8 minutes in real time). 1 light year = 63,240 AU. Unless there is a closer candidate, it looks like “CURTAINS” for the location of a binary twin